Messages in this thread | | | Date | Mon, 21 Jun 2010 16:46:46 -0400 | From | Don Zickus <> | Subject | Re: [PATCH] Add TAINT_HARDWARE_UNSUPPORTED flag |
| |
On Mon, Jun 21, 2010 at 01:00:08PM -0700, Andrew Morton wrote: > > Internally here that is how we planned on using the flag. We weren't sure > > if upstream would accept that piece or not, so we started with the flag > > for now to at least reserve the bit. > > > > But I can see your point about the other printk being a little > > user-hostile if someone forgot to call the wrapper function. > > > > I can respin with the wrapper function (Prarit is on vacation) > > Not telling the user _which_ hardware is causing the problem is daft. > > > or go with > > Alan's idea of just reserving the upper few bits. > > um. Given that the vendor needs to patch the individual drivers to > indicate ther unsupported status, why not just patch in the taint > changes as well?
Well we wanted to secure a bit flag first, so we don't bite ourselves later and have to change the userspace tools.
Cheers, Don
| |